Seanad debates

Thursday, 3 December 2009

Report by Commission of Investigation into Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin: Statements

 

5:00 am

Photo of Labhrás Ó MurchúLabhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

All of us serving in public life are used to challenges and in many debates in this Chamber, we have almost been exhilarated that we have had a challenge because we have a particular belief or vision that we like to put forward. Anybody who reads this report would have to admit that it weighs very heavily on the human spirit. One reaches a stage as a public representative where we must go very deep to find what we regard as the right words at this time. The more words uttered, the more empty they seem, which is sad. We tend to get frustrated and disillusioned, wondering how helpless we are to respond and act in a time like this.

As bad as it is for us, what must it have been like for the victims? We have nightmares from the fact that this could have even happened without people being aware of it. How must the victims have felt as they had to live it every minute of every day? Their lives were ruined and stolen from them. In addition to the vile crimes is the question of how they felt in the company of people who were privileged and had positions of trust but who could use that trust against innocent people.

As the victims got older and perhaps took a deeper knowledge of the gospel, they may have asked how the people who perpetrated the crimes were the very people who were expected to say how important children were to the founder of Christianity, Christ himself. Even using those words in this debate, there seems to be a clash between State and religion. In many ways they are inextricably bound in history and if it unravels that way, let it be the case. That is not an issue that worries me at this time.

The link between church and State is very much part of our characteristic. We did not often differentiate between the two. Therefore when we speak, as a Catholic and legislator in my case, we must balance the words so as not to give offence to any of the victims. We must also be careful not to allow a scenario to develop by turning a blind eye to what happened in the past, is happening in the present and which should never happen in future. As legislators that will be our biggest challenge.

We respond first by expressing our revulsion. We will apportion blame and in many ways the report has done that. If criminal prosecution is involved, let it be the case. When all this is done we must look forward. I remember hearing credible comments from the Opposition benches on a number of occasions when we discussed the topic. They asked if we are examining, as a State, where we are with regard to children's welfare.

That is the pertinent question and it has nothing to do with politics, policies or anything of the kind. We must ask if we are allowing something to happen now that will require a further investigation in years to come. I am not just talking about sexual abuse but all kinds of abuse and deprivation visited on young people. I can think of towns in this country where streets are segregated, although not loudly. If a person comes from a particular street, one may not give him or her much recognition. As a young person it annoyed me when that was the case. I know this is the lowest rung of deprivation but it is all part of the same issue, which is the recognition of the full potential of every God-given human being.

I went to mass last Sunday in Holycross, which is a restored abbey and reflects many centuries of church history. On the way I asked myself the question of whether the size of the congregation would reflect the outrage which we, as members of the church, felt against people who had got into positions of privilege and trust. Would the size of the congregation in some way show that our faith and spirit had been stultified beyond recovery? I wondered if the congregation would in some way avail of the opportunity to express a sense of outrage and protest within the church itself.

The size of the congregation did not reflect the outrage and it almost seemed bigger than previous Sundays when I went to Holycross. In my simple way I tried to analyse that, and I felt it was a determination by the laity to take control of the issue. Without stating a cliché, we were always told that the church was the laity in many ways, although I often felt that it was only brought into vogue when it suited.

The people in that church and many churches throughout the country were prepared to state that the church as a human institution was not the ultimate, and the church as a human institution in history would have had many cases of abuse within it. There is no question about that. These cases may have been very serious but could be glossed over. People would go back to their own simple and fundamental - I use those words in the best sense - faith.

There was a young priest on the altar last Sunday. I could not stop thinking about the report and how we had all failed the victims. When I use the word "all", I mean not just priests but also the State and everybody else. When I saw the young priest approach the altar, I thought to myself he had entered the priesthood in recent times. He had no hand, act or part in this terrible, outrageous history with which we are dealing. I am sure he entered the priesthood with the best of intentions to give service to others in keeping with the history of the church. I have often asked myself whether, in all of my dealings with the religious - be they Christian Brothers, priests or nuns - I have ever experienced anything untoward towards anybody else. I have not. I have asked others the same question and neither have they. Like me, I am sure that young priest is wondering how he has found himself in this mess.

I would not in any way minimise the outrages that form the basis of the Murphy report, but let me give an example on a different scale of how we all felt on one occasion. Let us look at the body politic and recall the scandals we have experienced in recent years. I used to ask myself whether anybody who had said they entered politics to serve the people could take money or be involved in anything underhand, particularly when they had been given the honour of being elected by the people. I have always asked myself that question. I cannot understand how anybody could do it. None of those present would do so. Therefore, we cannot understand how anybody else would do it. However, my experience is that once it happened, we were all tarred with the same brush. That is exactly what will happen in the church. Therefore, if we are to be genuine in looking after those who have suffered, we must focus on the perpetrators. While we must also focus on the structures, we must remember we should not visit another injustice on those who are blameless within the church. If we are capable of dealing with the issue in this way, we will serve the needs of all the people, including those who still hold a deep faith at this time.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.